You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Go to Page...
Thank you for crosschecking our sponsors!
About This Page: This is a discussion on Politics within the LetsGoKings.com forums, at Los Angeles Kings Hockey Fan Forum. In study, evidence of liberal-bias bias - Los Angeles Times
An interesting study that contradicts what a lot of people in this forum spout on a regular basis.
The Center
An interesting study that contradicts what a lot of people in this forum spout on a regular basis.
Quote:
The Center for Media and Public Affairs at George Mason University, where researchers have tracked network news content for two decades, found that ABC, NBC and CBS were tougher on Obama than on Republican John McCain during the first six weeks of the general-election campaign.
Quote:
During the evening news, the majority of statements from reporters and anchors on all three networks are neutral, the center found. And when network news people ventured opinions in recent weeks, 28% of the statements were positive for Obama and 72% negative.
Network reporting also tilted against McCain, but far less dramatically, with 43% of the statements positive and 57% negative, according to the Washington-based media center.
BTW . . . as stated in the argument, this study was done by the same guy who did a study on the primary race, in which he found Obama DID get more positive press than McCain - and was apparently heralded for bringing that to Fox New's attention.
Overall McCain gets very little coverage compared to Obama. Did you not notice the media frenzy when Obama went overseas? Every news agency was sending its top reporters to cover it. McCain has been over there many times and we didn't even notice it was covered. No way one study does not make up for the obvious left leaning mass media. "Negative media" like that picture of "Muslim Obama" and his wife on the suface gets lumped in as "negative" but it was clearly a poke at the perceived Conservatives view of him. Lets just ask Keith Olberman - he'll tell you he is not a shill for the Dem party and Obama. I'll save you the trouble of pointing out that Fox News does the same on the other side. Maybe we should support Pelosi and the Dems with the "Fairness Doctrine" to squash all media that doesn't support the lefts views? The right may have Rush, Fox and a few other whackos but you cannot tell me that the major "news" media here in the US is not heavily left-wing leaning.
__________________ "The day the masses figure out that they can vote to give themselves money is the day Democracy dies"
The major news media in the US is not heavily left-wing leaning. They are center-right.
An example of the subtleties of the bias not just on TV but in Newspapers - when there is a politician in trouble for something, if it is a Repub, that is noted in the title or the first sentence, but if it is a Dem, you won't see the party affiliation until the last part of the story.
The national broadcast news on CBS, NBC, and ABC is actively searching for negatives stories and spins about Obama and actively overlooking "gotcha" stories on McCain for a pretty simple reason. Older voters and low information voters tend to watch the networks and they tend to like McCain. If the news pisses them off they turn away to another network that doesn't. All the networks are contesting for the same high colesterol, calcium loss afflicted, bladder control challenged, Viagra using demographic.
Obama's trip didn't get him more favorable coverage than McCain because the press bent over backward to "cover their own coverage" of the trip and honor every scurrilous bit of criticism that the McCain campaign emailed them during the trip.
Cable of course is different because its shows are targeted at people who have clearer political preference.
The press tends to focus on 'gaffs' and turn campaigns into personal contests to avoid focusing on policy because they don't believe people can understand policy and will tune away. CNN is particularly blatant about avoiding analysis that is nuanced and its talking heads freely ridicule guests and commentators who act like the viewers aren't simpletons. Chris Matthews does the same.
Most of the TV beltway insiders replace real analysis with snarky insider'jokes' and cynicism. See especially Gloria Borger, Campbell Brown, Andrea Mitchell, David Gregory and scumbags like that.
__________________
"For if once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." Thomas DeQuincey, 1700's
Last edited by Leonidas; July 28th, 2008 at 12:12 PM.
An interesting study that contradicts what a lot of people in this forum spout on a regular basis.
BTW . . . as stated in the argument, this study was done by the same guy who did a study on the primary race, in which he found Obama DID get more positive press than McCain - and was apparently heralded for bringing that to Fox New's attention.
It wasn't a political thing, it's just that the reporters feel bad about criticizing a really, really, old guy.
Seriously though, the right always complains about a liberal bias so that they can define what the center is.
Seriously though, the right always complains about a liberal bias so that they can define what the center is.
I 100% agree with this statement. Any menton of something that is left of the right is automatically liberal - even though it's truly centralist thinking.
An interesting study that contradicts what a lot of people in this forum spout on a regular basis.
BTW . . . as stated in the argument, this study was done by the same guy who did a study on the primary race, in which he found Obama DID get more positive press than McCain - and was apparently heralded for bringing that to Fox New's attention.
I'm sorry. This study does not fit my preconcieved ideas about how the media works or how the liberals are poisoning the airwaves with their drivel.
I'm sorry. This study does not fit my preconcieved ideas about how the media works or how the liberals are poisoning the airwaves with their drivel.
With a taste of your lips
I'm on a ride
You're toxic
I'm slipping under
With a taste of poison paradise
I'm addicted to you
Don't you know that you're toxic
And I love what you do
Don't you know that you're toxic
With a taste of your lips
I'm on a ride
You're toxic
I'm slipping under
With a taste of poison paradise
I'm addicted to you
Don't you know that you're toxic
And I love what you do
Don't you know that you're toxic
An interesting study that contradicts what a lot of people in this forum spout on a regular basis.
BTW . . . as stated in the argument, this study was done by the same guy who did a study on the primary race, in which he found Obama DID get more positive press than McCain - and was apparently heralded for bringing that to Fox New's attention.
...and here's one that contradicts what you spew on a regular basis.
"I suspected that many media outlets would tilt to the left because surveys have shown that reporters tend to vote more Democrat than Republican," said Tim Groseclose, a UCLA political scientist and the study's lead author. "But I was surprised at just how pronounced the distinctions are."
"Overall, the major media outlets are quite moderate compared to members of Congress, but even so, there is a quantifiable and significant bias in that nearly all of them lean to the left," said co‑author Jeffrey Milyo, University of Missouri economist and public policy scholar.
Quote:
Of the 20 major media outlets studied, 18 scored left of center, with CBS' "Evening News," The New York Times and the Los Angeles Times ranking second, third and fourth most liberal behind the news pages of The Wall Street Journal.
Only Fox News' "Special Report With Brit Hume" and The Washington Times scored right of the average U.S. voter.
Quote:
"A media person would have never done this study," said Groseclose, a UCLA political science professor, whose research and teaching focuses on the U.S. Congress. "It takes a Congress scholar even to think of using ADA scores as a measure. And I don't think many media scholars would have considered comparing news stories to congressional speeches."
Quote:
The results break new ground.
"Past researchers have been able to say whether an outlet is conservative or liberal, but no one has ever compared media outlets to lawmakers," Groseclose said. "Our work gives a precise characterization of the bias and relates it to known commodity — politicians."
Groseclose and Milyo based their research on a standard gauge of a lawmaker's support for liberal causes. Americans for Democratic Action (ADA) tracks the percentage of times that each lawmaker votes on the liberal side of an issue. Based on these votes, the ADA assigns a numerical score to each lawmaker, where "100" is the most liberal and "0" is the most conservative. After adjustments to compensate for disproportionate representation that the Senate gives to low‑population states and the lack of representation for the District of Columbia, the average ADA score in Congress (50.1) was assumed to represent the political position of the average U.S. voter.....
The New York Times looked similar to Sen. Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., who has an ADA score of 74.
Also, since the article was written in 2005 and the study was done on reports from the last decade (1995-2005), and since it relies on Congressional averages to determine the centrist position, and since the Republicans controlled Congress from 1995 to 2005.... well, you get my drift.
Thanks for playing K17.
Also, Ronald Reagan was a closeted homosexual, he propositioned me in a mens room in 1975. True story.
Last edited by OddManRush; August 6th, 2008 at 09:01 PM.
"Past researchers have been able to say whether an outlet is conservative or liberal, but no one has ever compared media outlets to lawmakers," Groseclose said. "Our work gives a precise characterization of the bias and relates it to known commodity — politicians."
The media is more liberal than a Republican-dominated Congress? Well, no **** Sherlock!
None of the outlets that reported on the study mentioned that the authors have previously received funding from the three premier conservative think tanks in the United States: the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research (AEI), The Heritage Foundation, and the Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace. Groseclose was a Hoover Institution 2000-2001 national fellow; Milyo, according to his CV (pdf), received a $40,500 grant from AEI; and, according to The Philanthropy Roundtable, Groseclose and Milyo were named by Heritage as Salvatori fellows in 1997.
And it's not like the media helped sell Iraq for the Bush administration or anything...
The "Liberal Bias" Bias 
KINGS17
